Reply to Bridgewater (2021), 'Response to Davies et al., 'Towards a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands''

G. T. Davies, C. M. Finlayson, E. Okuno, N. C. Davidson, R. C. Gardner, W. R. Moomaw, D. E. Pritchard

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


We reply to the main concerns raised by Bridgewater (2021)in his response to Davies et al. (2021a), 'Towards a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands'. We appreciate the contribution of Bridgewater (2021)to this emerging conversation and, although we disagree with some of his assessments and statements, we do not find his points to be incompatible with support for the Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands (ROW). This reply focuses on four areas of concern raised by Bridgewater (2021). First, we describe why a wetlands-specific declaration will add important value to other Rights of Nature declarations. Second, we discuss how the ROW does not detract from, but rather can contribute to and complement, existing conservation and management approaches and mechanisms. Third, we agree on the importance of weaving Indigenous and local knowledge with other knowledges and emphasise that the ROW should not be confused with or misused to undermine the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities. Finally, we explain how legal rights can and have been granted to non-humans, including elements of Nature, such as wetlands.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1401-1407
Number of pages7
JournalMarine and Freshwater Research
Issue number10
Early online date21 Sep 2021
Publication statusPublished - 2021


Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to Bridgewater (2021), 'Response to Davies et al., 'Towards a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands'''. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this